Biggie wrote
Is irony objective, as objective as say your “bullshit?”
Biggie, you’ve complained that this place is full of kids such as myself rather than real philosophers such as yourself, that was all you not KT.
No, it’s Kids. Something I just made up one day to encompass my reaction to what I construe to be minds that are not even remotely challenging. Or their “contributions” tend to consist of youtube videos. Urwrongx1000 and his rabid, declamatory liberals-are-scum-dog posts.
What, for example, I tried to convey regarding my reaction to your own rabid, declamatory “contributions” here: ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop … 1&t=195978
As for the "real philosophers here – or what I call the “serious philosophers” – they often have very sophisticated and challenging minds. Karpel Tunnel for example. But in regard to the things that most preoccupy me from my signature threads, they almost never come down out of the clouds. The Magnus Anderson types.
Still, I’m ever and always stuck with admitting that my own posts here are little more than subjective “existential contraptions” in turn.
Yo, Wendy! You’re up!!
…, if there is curly, there should really be the other two, mo, and Larry.
Why curly? Because he does real philosophy, or maybe reel philosophy.
The latter is a good metaphor for cutting out the least desirable , unphilosophical parts, that may not fit into a club atmosphere.
But it is what it is, and bringing things down to basics has been the aim of no less illustrative thinkers then. those positive about simplicity for it’s own sake.
But that it doesn’t or can’t hold too much water anymore , is just a reminder that all schools of thought have to change with the times !
Once again, I have no idea what point you are making here, but it does allow me to bring this thread back up to the top. And maybe this time Wendy will take the bait. 
I’m sticking ito point , to put 'weirdness" ’ into. contexts which may dampen enthusiasm ,to the point , where other opinions can coexist on the same plane
Please bring her on .or rather, why shouls she take the bait?
On one hand You are seeking some sort of validation , and on the other quing her that is is a bait that she should avoid,., .
I really can’t tell if You are trying to form a socially objective distaste for my point of view, or attempting to ground what appears to You to be some kind. of intentional bait that has You in mind as an object.
Regardless, it is not a match of wits in looking for, but mutual understanding.
Biggie wrote
My correspondence with iambigious I can be said to mirror the larger values within which such ideas can be floated: my emphasis is in trying to find elements that stress mutual understanding, not devisive tactics of evasive and divisive rhetoric.
And then again, even if I may be wrong, I do not reject a continuation do to fears of not winning the narrative.
( Because in a substantial discussion, winning of loosing is eclipsed by coming to terms.)
The general political climate is reflected in this era of distrust from ambiguous power plays , insecurity , apathetic feelings within contexts that do not admit exits.
And it cam be said, if such appears as a projection with which no one can honestly identify, then such a position needs to be redifined as an illusion.
My motto being, unlike one that proclaims my way, or an unwitting high way, I do not suggest the possibility of being wrong, but welcome the chance to be proven as such, as the derivation from one to the other is phenomenally irreducible.
If personally experience is anything to go by. I’m going to assume its because its so hard to get posts that even show up. If you’re a newbie.